Under the new system, a user who purchases and stakes EOS, earns rewards, and then uses those rewards to rent resources may be subject to potential taxable events they wouldn't be otherwise under the current system (obviously depending on where they live). This could present a new hurdle to adoption.
The impact on history providers they tied in with taxable events was a great twist we hadn't thought of and is an excellent case for why history would be even more important under the new model.
eosio - deposit, data uses "deposited" eosio - withdraw, data uses "withdrew"
Makes sense, but
eosio - buyrex, data uses "lend" eosio - sellrex, data uses "unlent"
Instead, continue the nomenclature:
eosio - lend eosio - unlent/lend
There's a critical difference in "buying and selling" versus lending and seeing the lent resource return. If REX tokens persist, it's important, imo. Countries design their policies around this kind of tedium and trivia.